Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery
Published in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 5/2013

01-05-2013 | Orthopaedic Surgery

The Copeland resurfacing humeral head implant does not restore humeral head anatomy. A retrospective study

Authors: Inger Mechlenburg, Anders Amstrup, Thomas Klebe, Stig Storgaard Jacobsen, Gerhardt Teichert, Maiken Stilling

Published in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery | Issue 5/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Recently, there has been concern that the Copeland resurfacing humeral head implant (RHHI) leaves the shoulder joint overstuffed. The purpose of this study was in a selected cohort of patients operated with a Copeland RHHI (1) to evaluate the Length of the Gleno-Humeral Offset (LGHO), (2) to assess the patient-reported quality of life and functional outcome measured by Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder Index (WOOS) and (3) to determine the number of revisions in the cohort.

Methods

Pre- and postoperative radiographs were retrieved from 71 of 91 possible patients operated with a Copeland RHHI from 2005 to 2009. The cohort consisted of 30 males and 41 females at a mean age of 61 (38–89) years. One radiologist measured the LGHO and performed double measurements. The WOOS score 1 year after surgery and the number of revisions from all patients operated with a Copeland RHHI in Denmark was requested from the Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry.

Results

The mean LGHO was 4.99 ± 0.53 cm before surgery and 5.39 ± 0.58 cm after surgery, (p < 0.001). 95 % limits of agreement for measurements of LGHO were ± 0.11 cm. One year after surgery, the WOOS score was 67 for the cohort and 64 for all patients operated with a Copeland RHHI in Denmark. 13 of 71 RHHI in the cohort were revised.

Conclusion

The Copeland RHHI causes significantly increased LGHO and leads to overstuffing in the shoulder joint. The WOOS score in the cohort was comparable to that for all other Danish patients operated with a Copeland RHHI.
Literature
1.
Norris TR, Iannotti JP (2002) Functional outcome after shoulder arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis: a multicenter study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 11(2):130PubMedCrossRef
2.
Raiss P, Pape G, Becker S, Rickert M, Loew M (2010) Cementless humeral surface replacement arthroplasty in patients less than 55 years of age. Orthopade 39(2):201PubMedCrossRef
3.
Buchner M, Eschbach N, Loew M (2008) Comparison of the short-term functional results after surface replacement and total shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis of the shoulder: a matched-pair analysis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 128(4):347PubMedCrossRef
4.
Mullett H, Levy O, Raj D, Even T, Abraham R, Copeland SA (2007) Copeland surface replacement of the shoulder. Results of an hydroxyapatite-coated cementless implant in patients over 80 years of age. J Bone Joint Surg Br 89(11):1466PubMedCrossRef
5.
Thomas SR, Wilson AJ, Chambler A, Harding I, Thomas M (2005) Outcome of Copeland surface replacement shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 14(5):485PubMedCrossRef
6.
Gordiev K, Seitz WH Jr (2004) Surface arthroplasty in shoulder arthritis. Semin Arthroplasty 15(4):183CrossRef
7.
Rasmussen JV, Jakobsen J, Brorson S, Olsen BS (2012) The Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry: clinical outcome and short-term survival of 2,137 primary shoulder replacements. Acta Orthop 83:171–173PubMedCrossRef
8.
Lehtinen JT, Belt EA, Kauppi MJ, Kaarela K, Kuusela PP, Kautiainen HJ, Lehto MU (2001) Bone destruction, upward migration, and medialisation of rheumatoid shoulder: a 15 year follow up study. Ann Rheum Dis 60(4):322PubMedCrossRef
9.
Stilling M, Mechlenburg I, Amstrup A, Soballe K, Klebe T (2012) Precision of novel radiological methods in relation to resurfacing humeral head implants: assessment by radiostereometric analysis, DXA, and geometrical analysis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 132:1521–1530PubMedCrossRef
10.
Thomas SR, Sforza G, Levy O, Copeland SA (2005) Geometrical analysis of Copeland surface replacement shoulder arthroplasty in relation to normal anatomy. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 14(2):186PubMedCrossRef
11.
Lo IK, Griffin S, Kirkley A (2001) The development of a disease-specific quality of life measurement tool for osteoarthritis of the shoulder: the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS) index. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 9(8):771PubMedCrossRef
12.
Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1(8476):307PubMedCrossRef
13.
Constant CR, Murley AH (1987) A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res (214):160–164
14.
Levy O, Copeland SA (2001) Cementless surface replacement arthroplasty of the shoulder. 5- to 10-year results with the Copeland mark-2 prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83(2):213PubMedCrossRef
15.
Ellenbecker TS, Bailie DS, Lamprecht D (2008) Humeral resurfacing hemiarthroplasty with meniscal allograft in a young patient with glenohumeral osteoarthritis. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 38(5):277PubMed
16.
Lynch JR, Franta AK, Montgomery WH Jr, Lenters TR, Mounce D, Matsen FA III (2007) Self-assessed outcome at two to four years after shoulder hemiarthroplasty with concentric glenoid reaming. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(6):1284PubMedCrossRef
17.
Wirth MA, Tapscott RS, Southworth C, Rockwood CA Jr (2006) Treatment of glenohumeral arthritis with a hemiarthroplasty: a minimum five-year follow-up outcome study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88(5):964PubMedCrossRef
18.
Bartelt R, Sperling JW, Schleck CD, Cofield RH (2011) Shoulder arthroplasty in patients aged fifty-five years or younger with osteoarthritis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 20(1):123PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
The Copeland resurfacing humeral head implant does not restore humeral head anatomy. A retrospective study
Authors
Inger Mechlenburg
Anders Amstrup
Thomas Klebe
Stig Storgaard Jacobsen
Gerhardt Teichert
Maiken Stilling
Publication date
01-05-2013
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery / Issue 5/2013
Print ISSN: 0936-8051
Electronic ISSN: 1434-3916
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-013-1715-8

Other articles of this Issue 5/2013

Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 5/2013 Go to the issue

Trauma Surgery

The effect of rotational deformity on patellofemoral parameters following the treatment of femoral shaft fracture

Trauma Surgery

Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis for humeral shaft fracture: a reproducible technique with the assistance of an external fixator

Hip Arthroplasty

Locking versus standard screw fixation for acetabular cups: is there a difference?

Handsurgery

Radio-lunate arthrodesis in rheumatoid arthritis: outcome and techniques

Orthopaedic Surgery

Biomechanical consequences of a posterior root tear of the lateral meniscus: stabilizing effect of the meniscofemoral ligament

Hip Arthroplasty

Early migration characteristics of a 180° porous-coated cup with 1-mm press fit